‘Livestock’

at | 26 Replies


Anyone?

Meanwhile…

Yesterday: ‘Devastating’

26 thoughts on “‘Livestock’

  1. Jonner

    from a risk management perspective seems like a reasonable assumption.

    there were a few questionable decisions made during the crisis management, but i don’t think this is one of them

    Reply
    1. Conksi

      yep
      + when I act like an eejit i often get ” insulted and ignored ”
      + Twitter handle of a wannabe politico

      Reply
      1. Cian

        You have a limited resource – such as COVID test capability (this was back in March). You have 5 test kits and the following requirement:
        a) a request for 5 tests in one location with a confirmed COVID case – for people showing symptoms.
        b) 5 requests for tests for people showing symptoms in areas where there are no know cases.

        What do you do?

        Reply
        1. SOQ

          That is resource planning not risk management.

          Risk management would have been to remove the positives into a separate environment, therefore reducing the risk of infection.

          Assuming all was positive because one was positive was a complete dereliction of their duty of care- and the most ageist thing I have ever seen.

          Reply
          1. Cian

            I could argue that the decision to use a resource to identify new clusters rather than confirm additional cases in a know cluster is risk management.

            But back to the question above. If there are limited resources which approach would you take?

          2. SOQ

            Bottom line is- despite all the assurances that there was adequate testing facilitates, they were actually practicing war time medicine- meaning on the QT, they were playing God and making decisions on who lived and who dies- that is shocking.

            Proper PPE and isolation of positives should have been a priority- not writing people off because they were old- even if the amount of tests was limited.

          3. Cian

            But back to the question above. If there are limited resources which approach would you take?

          4. SOQ

            I would have used the tests on what even at the time was known to be the most vulnerable group.

            I would have also have done my best to ensure proper PPE and isolation procedures were in place for the most vulnerable group.

          5. Cian

            I didn’t make any distinction between the people who needed the test – they are all equally vulnerable. Let me clarify the question slightly:

            You have a limited resource – such as COVID test capability (this was back in March). You have 5 test kits and the following requirement:
            a) a request for 5 tests in one location (an old-folks home) with a confirmed COVID case – for elderly people showing symptoms.
            b) 5 requests for tests for elderly people showing symptoms in 5 separate areas (all old-folks homes) where there are no know cases.

            What do you do?

    2. Johnnythree

      from a risk management perspective seems like a reasonable assumption*

      *inhumane logic there. Ever look at your life?

      Reply
    3. Ricky

      Questionable?

      Turning old folks camps into death camps by introducing infected into effectively what were prisons

      By removing I hate to use the term they arereferrrf to BED BLOCKERS

      NO ONE EVEN THOUGHT OF THE IMPLICATIONS BY CLEARING OUT READY TO SAVE LIVES BY DOCTORS ANF FRONT LINE STAFF

      Reply
  2. Enn

    There was a huge deficit of tests available. Making the conservative decision to treat all residents with symptoms as if they have covid does, to me, seem a sensible form of crisis management in that situation.

    Am I missing something?

    Reply
      1. Enn

        How glib of you. Well done.

        What I have since realised I was missing was that they did not effectively quarantine the positive case, assuming ‘all had it’ and not separating people. This is indeed questionable and potentially worthy of condemnation.

        There was still a deficit of tests though.

        Reply
  3. RuilleBuille

    It is becoming clearer that it wasn’t a mistake that the elderly and infirm were ignored. They were deliberately excluded.

    Reply
      1. Cian

        Euthanasia? I’m not sure you are using that word correctly.

        …although, it is possible that you are misusing “callous”.

        Reply
    1. Ricky

      Too busy supporting the spreading fears

      There are few who ask questions and the covid

      Imagine going against the pack

      Sure Boris was mauled when he mentioned herd immunity

      Trump when he said a flu

      Per head of population we have more infected and deaths

      Reply
      1. Cian

        yes and no
        per million population:
        UK cases: 3,997         deaths: 562
        Ireland cases: 5,043   deaths: 333
        USA cases: 5,402       deaths: 315

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *